The potential is still there, though. The risk is null because the Empire is feeding the people. simple truth. Plus, we do not know HOW many farms skyrim actually has, which means that food shortages could happen.

Skyrim has enough food to feed themselves now, they can feed themselves during a war. Systems can be put in place to negate any effect on the civilian populace.

its not a potential worth sacrificing freedoms over. Skyrim will survive.

So it is better to have all the freedoms while the potential for everything to go wrong looms because it is "not worth it?" wow.

For now, maybe. What happens in the future? one cannot predict the future.

the ironic thing is that the civil war isn't going to matter.

In the next TES6 game, The Civil War will be referenced to in some obscure book found in a remote cave. It will not even reference to which side won.

Your right, one can't predict the future so instead of saying I'm wrong and your right, lets just agree both are possible outcomes. Because if you want to argue so much that it WILL happen then you are saying you can predict the future.

I know, but what I am saying is that it is best to stay with the Empire because all those problems CAN happen with an independent Skyrim but an Empire-controlled Skyrim does not have to worry about the potential at all.

I hope that's the case. Dragonborn was perhaps the first case of Bethesda "cutting off the branches" as it's referred to, and making certain TES III choices canon (and making it clear that at least one faction quest, albeit an extremely stupid one, was never done). Granted, those choices would have been pretty inconsequential even if Red Year hadn't happened, and I suspect the inclusion of the choices in Dragonborn were more of easter eggs rather than a policy change on mutually exclusive playuer choices. At least, I hope it is.

Just to ask, which one (faction) was not done? EEC?

I just see the current problems staying with the empire outweighing the "possible and most likely impossible" problems that could but likely won't occur. Your suggesting religious persecution, weak rulership, thalmor occupation and your freedom trampled on which IS happening, is better then maybe but not likely starving in the future when ever the next war begins.

sure hope you never end up in any sort of governing position to be making decisions like this.

Religious freedom, culture and good leadership is more important then living as a slave to the empire who has to make sure the thalmor approve of everything they do before they do it.

Give me a free Skyrim and I'll happily take the slim and narrow chance of starvation would the war happen in my life time. And I know my children will be glad I did.

Not sure where you get that idea, since the only information we have about why Ulfric learned the Thu'um was because he was selected by the Greybeards as a child. In other words, Ulfric had little to no choice in the matter. He later left the teachings of the Greybeards, but so what? Even if he took vows, I'd dismiss that because he was a child.

So, because Ulfric brought a gun to a gun fight, he is dishonorable? It only becomes "gun to a knife fight" if you can show that the tradition frowns upon the use of the Thu'um.

Jurgen the Windcaller lost to the Tribunal of Morrowind and got butthurt about it. Even the Greybeards say that he, and only he, thought about it. No divine intervention. Then he used his considerable power to force everyone else to do like he did. That you can get a Dragon Soul from his tomb suggests that he might have been Dragonborn.

I don't accept this narrative, because even if I grant it in full, it is just one man's opinion. And it is very contrary to the way the Thu'um was introduced to the Nords large scale, where it was given to them as a weapon.

You can't really say Ulfric breaks tradition without specifically cherry picking the Greybeard's narrative on the Thu'um, which didn't exist for quite a while, and which is never even applied to the duel in the game.

Still don't get it.

Another big misconception I seem to see is that: Empire = long term.

I don't think anything could be further from the truth, given that any leader with an ounce of thought for the long term conflict with the Dominion wouldn't have so foolishly alienated both the Redguards and the Nords. I find the Empire's stand to be more "Okay, we'll sacrifice as much as needed now, so we can hastily rebuild our military and hope it gets done before the Empire falls apart from within".

Questionable assumption, given that the Empire, at the time of the Great War, had been declining in their military might and didn't expect an attack. Now they have the Legion defending the southern border against possible Dominion invasions. They'd stand a better chance at a defensive war now than they did in the Great War, since the Dominion can no longer take them by surprise and do tremendous damage before the Legion can properly regroup. And, without this assumption, the rest of your point don't really seem to hold up.

Edit: Of course, assuming the assumption is correct, that only further validates removing more provinces from an Empire that is clearly too weak to protect them anymore.

Edit 2: And you dismiss the option of letting the Jarls of Skyrim sort it out themselves, without Legion intervention. Like they did in Hammerfell before the Great War. The Crowns and the Forebears were fighting a civil war, with no Imperial interference ever mentioned.

Ugh, another CW thread.

Problem is it is fun to guess how the outcome will be, but in the end we do not know until the next Elder Scroll game. Even then the CW might briefly mentioned, but no real outcome as Beth tends to make things vague enough.

For me, ah forget it, this is not sports as that part is real.

*Seriously Tdroid, when it comes to CW you have longest lined poster in this forum. Wish you shorten your points than making a mile post as some of us really do not have time read through each one. I think you have interesting points, but gets lost into SC drowning than to the point. Keep simple my man is all I'm asking. *

The Mages Guild Questline in Morrowind has an option to kill the Leadership of Great House Telvanni. The Hortator Quest allows killing Telvanni Archmagisters as an option. Neloth has been killed in a few of My Morrowind Playthroughs.

I'm with Axel Rose on this one: "We don't need no Civil War!"

"It feeds the rich, while it buries the poor-or... Ain't that fresh?"

How boring that would be

Seriously though, I prefer to keep it simple, but certain points require a bit more elaboration. Especially if I am responding to someone whose base assumptions I think are wrong.